War Against Terror Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

War Against Terror - Essay Example Whether the terror war is based on a series of structured brainstorming sessions that began shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, supplemented by selective research and updates (Ronczkowski, 2004, p. 2) or based on London bombings we are still struggling with defining, dealing with, and addressing terrorism and the roles of officials and agencies in combating terrorism. What have we gained so far Terrorism is there; War on terrorism is going on; we have not gained security against terrorism but a social and moral fear because of politics and legal concerns. Such concerns have emerged a new fear and panic within us. On the other hand the field of terrorism in the context of research or military arenas has revealed that there is a lack of awareness, especially by law enforcement personnel, as to how to best deal with and analyse terrorism and terrorist-related activity. Therefore, how are we expecting law enforcement personnel to identify something about which they do not have a conceptual understanding Law enforcement academies have always focused on training and developing an individual so he understands every aspect of what he can do and what is expected of him in criminal-based situations locally, according to state guidelines. So how can law enforcement personnel be expected to effectively address the international reaches of terrorism without proper training and awareness of what they are attempting to identify and analyse Even it is found out that the information obtained from terrorism analysis is used in strategic planning for areas such as crime prevention and conflicts. However, is cr ime prevention the same as terrorism prevention Such a war on terror is producing nothing but causing in the society intense fear, anxiety, apprehension, panic, dread, and horror. (Garaeu, 2004, p. 14) The main targets of terrorist compulsion are the civilian population, distinguishing these techniques from conventional acts of war directed primarily against military targets. Often members are selected and randomly attacked and escorted towards the preplanned violence that is directed against targets specified. Terrorism often targets business corporations in the private sector. However the war on terror suggests measures to identify all the predictable and unpredictable impacts of terrorist influence upon its instant victims. The war against terror develops its intentions to fight and inspire anxiety, even among its' own members of the public which are far removed from its immediate surrounding area, as well as generating widespread moral disgust about the use of these techniques. The war on terror is often considered as a war which is aimed primarily at terrorists but accidentally military targets also suffer thereby inviting 'collateral damage' to occur, where many civilians are accidentally hurt, but this differs from violent acts that are intentionally directed against the general public. One cannot say how much such a war is beneficial for eradicating terrorists but this is for sure that such wars cause moral turmoil among the citizens. (Just et al, 2003, p. 7) The number of US institutes and research centres and 'think thanks' which have now added this subject to their research agendas against 'war on terror' or, have been newly established to specialise in this field

William Shakespeares Richard III Essay -- William Shakespeare Richard

William Shakespeare's Richard III William Shakespeare’s characterization of Britain’s historical monarch Richard III, formerly Duke of Gloucester, is one of the most controversial in literature. To this day there are arguments upholding Richard III’s villainy and ascertaining his murder of the Princes in the tower, just as there are those who believe that he has been falsely represented by Shakespeare’s play and fight avidly to clear his name of any and all crimes. Because of the uncertainty surrounding his true character, Richard III is an intriguing personality to put into modern culture, which is exactly what Ian McKellen does in his rendition of the infamous ruler. However, McKellen’s portrayal of Richard III preserves the basic personality of Shakespeare’s character and continues the idea of Richard III as tyrant and murderer; there is no doubt that McKellen captures the bestial nature of Richard, but even though this main staple of the play is kept intact, there are oth er aspects of this adaptation that are not so true to Shakespeare’s vision. Overall, however, I believe that this is an honest modernization of a classic play, and that Shakespeare would have approved of most of the changes made, with only a few exceptions. The film adaptation of Richard III was relatively straight forward, and certain scenes were more clear on the screen than on the page, but there were several confusing episodes that detracted from an otherwise good rendition of Richard III. Without having read the book first, I feel that a viewer would have been totally lost during the opening scenes of destruction because there are no names given until ten minutes into the film, and even those are dropped rather casually. Because I have read... ... written play there is no such direction to let the audience know that Anne may not be aware of his full intentions or desires. It is entirely possible that when this play was performed in Shakespeare’s time this is exactly how the actor spoke his lines, but it is not clear one way or the other from the printed page. All in all, the film version of Richard III might be even more terrifying and brutal than the print version, because modern audiences will probably connect more with a visual image of atrocity rather than a purely written one. I believe that this is the power of Shakespeare’s work– it is powerful on paper, but still more powerful in performance. It is performance that lends his work its full potential, and as such the film of Richard III is true to the core argument of Shakespeare’s original text, illustrating the inner beast found in the soul of a man.

Han and Roman Attitudes Toward Technology Essay

Technology is an important aspect in all civilizations, and depending on the point of view looked at the opinions vary greatly. Especially when comparing opinions of lower class and upper class people, or gender. During the early first centuries of the Han Dynasty and Roman Empire there were a lot of mixed feelings toward technology. Depending on whose opinion you heard the answer would vary between negative and positive outlooks. Most opinions seemed to have been based off of the following categories, practicality, citizen’s use, and beauty. Opinions varied depending on the major concern of the point of view and the class they belonged to. When opinions were weighed on practicality their major concern was the efficiency of the technology and if it was easy to use. One Han government official wrote to local officials in the early second century (B. C. E) concerning flood prevention (doc. 1). His opinion was well educated because being of an upper class and being a government official meant he was well educated, and also his opinion was of a situation he witnessed and he had proof to support his thoughts. His opinion was unbiased and trustworthy because his concerns were not for himself but for all the people of the civilization. This is proven when he states more organization is needed in order to stay on top of issues that affect everyone of the dynasty. He felt technology was advanced enough to prevent flooding more efficiently but there needed to be a greater effort into establishing a greater number of water conservation offices in each district. Overall he did not believe that technology was lacking but the organization of the use of technology was. Huan Tan, an upper-class philosopher in about 20 C.  E also had an opinion weighing on practicality (doc. 3). Being a philosopher you can assume he was well educated and therefore his opinion is educated. Huan’s point of view was based on practicality because he had a positive opinion on technology due to the efficiency and usefulness of tools and the fast progression of it. He proves the technology is efficient by stating facts like that the pestle and the mortar were modified and were made capable of allowing the weight of the whole body to be used. Since Huan included these sorts of facts it shows he’s well educated in the area of technology. Overall Huan Tan had a very positive outlook on technology, feeling that it evolved at a steady pace. The source History of the Early Han Dynasty was a government sponsored source that comes from the period of about 200 C. E. (doc. 4). This opinion is clearly biased and untrustworthy because its government sponsored and therefore was written to support the government and make it look successful. This is proven when the governor of Nanyang, Tu Shui is made to look good by the statement that he improved technology because he loved his people so much he wanted to make life easy as possible for them. Although this point of view is untrustworthy it is still weighed on practicality due to the supposed concern of the efficiency and having technology be beneficial without having to do much work. The last opinion formed by practicality was one of a Seneca upper –classman philosopher and adviser to Emperor Nero (doc. 7). This point of view again is someone of a higher class with more money and therefore does not rely on technology as much as someone of a lower class. His opinion of technology was negative; he believed tools were invented by unintelligent men. His opinion was based off of practicality and was proven by his statement that recent inventions were not only inefficient but also were useless. He felt inventors no longer, no matter how intelligent, did not think outside the box and only tackled mild issues that were not of large concern. Overall he felt greater issues needed to be taken on by people of both intelligence and creativity. Other opinions seemed to have most concern with citizen’s use. When weighing on this, the point of view was most affected by the knowledge of who used the technology or the convenience of the access to the technology. A government official by the name if Huan Guan has a negative outlook on technology based off of citizen’s use (doc. 2). This perspective is from an educated upper class man who therefore does not do much manual labor. Foundry work and salt boiling were at one time allowed to be done by workers as long as they followed two conditions, they has to report they were doing so and they had to pay a tax. During the earlier time the tools that were used to do these jobs were made by families and were efficient and well-made. Later on the state forced citizens to only use the iron tools manufactured by them, which were nonfunctional. This is known as convict labor, and in doing so they also monopolized the salt and iron trades. This issue angered Huan Guan because this caused the salt and iron prices to rise and made it so lower class citizens could not afford to buy either. Huan felt technology was being weakened by the government and that making it more difficult for families to continue their businesses was not right. Another opinion based off of citizen’s use was one of a Cicero upper-class Roman political leader of the first century (B. C. E. ). This opinion comes from an upper class man who does not do any handy-work and therefore cannot state and accurate opinion on technology. He believed there was a fine line between the difference of a â€Å"gentleman† and a man. He felt certain jobs were degrading to men, such as manual labor or â€Å"handy work†. He states, â€Å"Vulgar and unbecoming to a gentleman are all the jobs hired workers take on†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (doc. 5). He feels the work they do is paid by the labor they do and not the skill of their work. In conclusion he doesn’t see any importance in the area of technology, also he doesn’t necessarily have a negative nor positive opinion he just doesn’t value it, h cares more about his status. The last source weighed on citizen’s use is one from Frontinus, a Roman general, governor of Britain and water commissioner for the city of Rome (doc. 8). His opinion is biased because he is governor of Britain and therefore feels his civilization is the most advanced and has the greatest technology because he is in charge of it. This is shown when he says that Roman technology exceeds any other including both the Egyptian’s and the Greeks. Frontinus feels that the works of those two civilizations are useless, he states, â€Å"Compare such numerous and indispensible structures carrying so much water with the idle pyramids, or the useless but famous works of the Greeks. † He feels only Roman technology has both the beauty aspect while still being efficient. He feels his technology is so successful because the aqueducts were so successful they made it possible for people of any class to have an abundance of water, which proves his opinion was based on citizen’s use. Lastly, some opinions were made by the beauty of technology. Very simply this is when the point of view is confirmed by the appearance rather than the efficiency or usefulness of the technology. Plutarch, a Greek-born Roman citizen and high official of the second century describes Gaius Gracchus a Roman political leader of the first century’s opinion on technology (doc. 6). This source is unreliable because it is not a primary source and therefore is not as reliable because the opinion could have been slightly altered by misinterpretation or on purpose. The major concern according to this source, of Gaius Gracchus was the appearance of everything and not the usefulness of it; he wanted everything to be pleasing to the eye. All roads were straight; both sides of bridges had to be â€Å"equal and parallel height with the result that the road for its entire course had a level and beautiful appearance. † (doc. 6). Overall the appearance was the greatest factor when it came to Gaius Gracchus. Again just as all the other documents the point of view belonged to an upper-class male, we have no opinions from a woman or someone of a lower class. Out of all the documents the point of view missing in order to truly decipher the overall attitudes towards Han and Roman technology is the opinion of a lower class person such as a peasant. All the documents come from the perspective of an upper-class male. Therefore the ultimate attitude toward the technology of Han and Rome cannot be determined. Each documents perspective varied depending on how they made their opinion, whether it was weighted on practicality, citizen’s use, or beauty.

What Is an Acrostic in English

An acrostic is a series of lines in which certain letters—usually the first in each line—forms a name or a message when read  in sequence. A memory device as well as a type of verbal play, the acrostic has been a popular form of entertainment for over 2,500 years. Acrostic derives from the Greek words end line. Examples of Acrostics The following are examples of Acrostics (follow the bold letters). Acrostic ACROSTIC: are playfulcontrivances of prose or verserendered so that each lineopens or closes with words insequence to read fromtop to bottom, theirinitial or final lettersconstituting a word or phrase. Acrostics as Mnemonic Devices Acrostic mnemonics are sentences in which the first letter of each word is the first letter of one of the things you need to remember...Acrostics are especially useful for long lists of things whose names dont begin with vowels. A famous acrostic for the planets Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto is My very energetic mother just served us nine pizzas, which can be replaced by My very evil mother just served us newts, should you agree with the 2006 reclassification of Pluto as a dwarf planet rather than a full-fledged one. Double Acrostics A double acrostic spells something out with the first and last letters. For example: Unite and untie are the same—so say you.Not in wedlock, I ween, has the unity been.In the drama of marriage, each wandering goutTo a new face would fly—all except you and IEach seeking to alter the spell in their scene. John Keats's Acrostic Give me your patience, sister, while I frameExact in capitals your golden name;Or sue the fair Apollo and he willRouse from his heavy slumber and instillGreat love in me for thee and Poesy.Imagine not that greatest masteryAnd kingdom over all the Realms of verse,Nears more to heaven in aught, than when we nurseAnd surety gives to love and Brotherhood. A Biblical Acrostic A third key rhetorical feature in Lamentations [a book of the Hebrew Bible] is the acrostic that structures four of the five poems (Lam 1-4)...Several purposes have been offered to explain the use of acrostics, including fulfilling magical rites, aiding memorization of poems, emphasizing completeness, or producing aesthetically pleasing literature (Westermann, 98-100; OConnor). Although there may be multiple purposes behind the use of acrostics, most likely they communicate that the poem expresses totality, and in the case of Lamentations both the total devastating effect of the destruction and the total expression of the pain of those who experienced it. Sources Anonymous, Double AcrosticDictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry Writings, ed. by Tremper Longman and Peter Enns. InterVarsity Press, 2008Evans, Rod L.,  Every Good Boy Deserves Fudge: The Book of Mnemonic Devices. Penguin, 2007Halley, Ned, Dictionary of Modern English Grammar. Wordsworth, 2005Keats, John, Georgiana Augusta Keats